WPC  2BVTZ 3|P)?xxxX/Xx6X@DQX@HP LaserJet 4/4MCL) Room 744HPLAS4.WRSSx  @,,Y!zX@2@ ZP@3|PHP LaserJet 4/4MCL) Room 744HPLAS4.WRSSC\  P6Q,,Y!zP"5@^*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ*7777CE7SSxJxJxJxJxJooJfJfJfJfJ7.7.7.7.xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxJxSxSxSxSxS]SxSxJxJoJoJoJfJfJfJxSxSxxSxSxSxSCS7S777SAxSf.fExSxSxSxo7oE]A]AN:*LS7JSSSSS.4}}S2S}277JJS77SS7J72t7[[[[^ee*C`^.wRSSn[Cfx`xWlRx[][ceIfIs`Wx[rriwge*7DSS77S^*7*.SSSSSSSSSS..^^^Jxooxf]xx7Axfxx]xo]fxxxxf7.7NS7JSJSJ7SS..S.SSSS7A.SSxSSJP!PZ7SJSS7]777JJ:S7A7xx*7SSSS!S7.S^7SC[227`L*724S}}}Jxxxxxxoffff7777xxxxxxx^xxxxxx]SJJJJJJoJJJJJ....SSSSSSS[SSSSSSS I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1. 1. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a)2@@@6 @v"5@^*7]SS.77S_*7*.SSSSSSSSSS77___SxoxxofASoxfx]oxxxxo7.7aS7S]J]J7S].7].]S]]JA7]SxSSJB%BW*7777CE7S]xSxSxSxSxSxxJoJoJoJoJA.A.A.A.x]SSSSx]x]x]x]xSxSx]SSxSxSf]xSxSxSxJxJxJoJoJoJSSSS]]C]A]A7A]S]o.oEx]x]SxxJxJ]A]AN:*ZS7SSSSSS27}}S2}}S}277SSS77SS7S72t7[[[[_ee*C`_.wRSSn[Cfx`xWlRx[][ceIfIs`Wx[rriwge*7]SS.77S_*7*.SSSSSSSSSS77___SxoxxofASoxfx]oxxxxo7.7aS7S]J]J7S].7].]S]]JA7]SxSSJB%BW7SSSS7]777SS:S7A7xx*7SSSS%S7}2S_7}SC[227`Z*727S}}}SxxxxxxxooooAAAAxx_xxxxxf]SSSSSSxJJJJJ....S]SSSSS[S]]]]S]"5@^2CRdd$CCdq2C28dddddddddd88qqqYzoCNzoozzC8C^dCYdYdYCdd88d8ddddCN8ddddY`(`l2CC!CCPRCddYYYYYYzYzYzYzYC8C8C8C8ddddddddddYdddddoddYYYYYzYzYzYddddddPdCdCCCdNdz8zRdddCRoNoNNF2[dCYddddd7>d<d<CCYYdCCddCYCdYzzzzCCCCqodYYYYYYYYYYY8888dddddddnddddddd"5@^2Coddȧ8CCdr2C28ddddddddddCCrrrdzNdzoȐC8CtdCdoYoYCdo8Co8odooYNCodddYO,Oh2CC!CCPRCdodddddȐYYYYYN8N8N8N8oddddooooddoddddzodddYYYYYYddddooPoNoNCNodo8RoodȐYYoNoNNF2ldCddddddy.C8*XC\  P6QP.?y.G8*XG4  pQA7PC2X DXP\  P6QXP.@7UC2XxXU4  pQXBW!0(X h0\  P6QhPs4dddX3d6X@DQ@D <<<X3lx,<6X@DQ,@MI(!XI,(\  P6Q,Pa$6,!X|6\  P6QP{,C8*XE,C*f9 xQX"5@^!,6CCoh,,CK!,!%CCCCCCCCCC%%KKK;{`YY`QJ``,4`Qw``J`YJQ``~``Q,%,?C,;C;C;,CC%%C%hCCCC,4%CC`CC;@@H!,,,,57,CC`;`;`;`;`;wYY;Q;Q;Q;Q;,%,%,%,%`C`C`C`C`C`C`C`C`C`C`;`C`C`C`C`CJC`C`;`;Y;Y;Y;Q;Q;Q;`C`C``C`C`C`C5C,C,,,C4`CQ%Q7`C`C`Cw`Y,Y7J4J4N/!reconsideration of the monetary forfeiture of $2,000 issued by the Field Operations Bureauү yO-ԍThe Field Operations Bureau was renamed Compliance and Information Bureau effective November 27, 1994.  xpursuant to Section 503(b), 47 U.S.C. 503(b), for willful violation of Section 301 of the  xCommunications Act of 1934, as amended, (the Act), 47 U.S.C. 301. On August 26, 1994, the  xField Operations Bureau, on its own motion, issued an Order setting aside its previous Order in  xthis case, 9 FCC Rcd 4447 (1994), and returning to pending status Jan Lane, Inc.'s Petition for  X&- xReconsideration..\&Xү yO/- xԍThe Bureau's action in setting aside the June 15, 1994, Order was taken in light of the July 12, 1994, decision  {O- xby the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in #C*f9 xQ ,X#United States Telephone Assoc. v. FCC# C\  P6QP#,  {O-28 F.3d 1232 (D.C. Cir. 1994), vacating the Commission's #C*f9 xQ ,X#Forfeiture Policy Statement, 8 FCC Rcd 6215 (1993).. Upon further review of the Petition for Reconsideration in this matter, the monetary forfeiture has been reassessed by the Bureau to $2,000.  X- II. BACKGROUND ă   _x2. On April 13, 1993, the Commission's Belfast Office issued a Notice of Apparent  xLiability (NAL) for $10,000 to Jan Lane. The penalty was imposed for operating on a frequency  xfor which it had no authorization from the Commission. Mr. Robert Pendergast, an employee  xyof Jan Lane, operated its marine radio in the Aeronautical Radio Service (frequency 5696.5 kHz)  xand caused interference to safety of flight communications of various units of the U.S. Coast  xMGuard. Based on the arguments raised in the response from Jan Lane's counsel, the Belfast  xNOffice issued a Notice of Forfeiture (NOF) for $2,000 on October 29, 1993. Jan Lane now  xappeals, contending that the FCC did not provide evidence that it willfully violated the Act. Jan  x>Lane argues that the FCC's identification of Mr. Pendergast is suspect at best and seeks all""|,))ZZ)""  xinformation relating to the identification. Jan Lane also contends that the FCC failed to prove  xLthat Mr. Pendergast's action constituted a willful violation of the Act because the Commission  xfailed to present evidence that Mr. Pendergast knowingly operated on an unauthorized frequency.  xFinally, Jan Lane argues that the Commission failed to show how any intentional and "willful" violation by an agent imposes liability on behalf of an "unknowing" principal corporation.  X_- III. DISCUSSION  XH-  X1- ` x3.` ` The forfeiture amount was originally assessed pursuant to the Commission's Policy  X - xStatement which was subsequently vacated by the Court, United States Telephone Assoc. v. FCC,  xk28 F.3d 1232 (D.C. Cir. 1994). In light of the Court's decision, we are assessing the forfeiture  xamount pursuant to the guidelines of Section 503 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. 503. In assessing  xforfeitures, Section 503 of the Act requires that the Commission take into account the nature,  x=circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree  xof culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and such other matters as justice may require. 47 U.S.C. 503(b)(2)(D).  Xb- ` x4.` ` Turning now to Jan Lane's arguments, regarding the identification of Mr.  xyPendergast, the Notice of Apparent Liability specifically points out that the station and person  xoperating were identified by intercept and voice identification by governmental agents from the  xjNational Marine Fisheries. Both techniques are accepted investigative techniques. As for Jan  xyLane's request for all tapes and transcripts, by letter dated November 2, 1995, the Belfast Office  xiprovided a duplicate tape to Jan Lane's attorney to satisfy this request. We received no response from Jan Lane to further dispute the identification of Mr. Pendergast.  X- ` x5.` ` Unlicensed operation is an egregious violation because of the potential interference  x[threat or, as in the instant case, actual interference to public safety frequencies. As the Notice  x\of Apparent Liability indicated, Jan Lane Inc., as owner of the F/V Alpha Omega II, was not  xlicensed to transmit on 5696.5 kHz. This unauthorized transmission caused interference to safety  xof flight communications transmitted by the Coast Guard. Contrary to the petitioner's claims, the  X7- xviolation is considered willfulX7 yO- xԍWillful is defined as the conscious and deliberate commission or omission of an act that violates a Commission  xrequirement. For a violation to be willful, it is not required that the violator also intend to violate a requirement of the Commission or be aware that it is committing a violation. 47 U.S.C. 312(f)(1). because the employee operated the radio outside of its authorized  x frequency, (i.e. maritime frequency band). An intent to deliberately violate the Act is not a  X - xprerequisite to establishing a willful violation. See Southern California Broadcasting Co., 6 FCC  xRcd 4387 (1991). As owner and employer, Jan Lane is responsible for the actions of its  X- xemployees. See Triad Broadcasting, Inc., 96 FCC 2d 1235 (1984). Accordingly, upon  xconsideration of all factors in this case, and in light of Section 503 of the Act, we find that the forfeiture amount originally assessed is still warranted. "",N(N(ZZ!"Ԍ X-0 IV. ORDERING CLAUSES ă  X-  Bx6. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT , pursuant to Section 503(b) of the  x{Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 503(b), and Section 1.106 of the Commission's Rules, 47  X-C.F.R. 1.106, the petition for reconsideration is DENIED .  Xv-  ?x7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 1.80 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R.  x1.80, Jan Lane, Inc., must, within thirty (30) days of the date of release of this Order, pay the  xforfeiture amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000) or file an Application for Review pursuant  x.to Section 1.115 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.115. Payment may be made by check  X - xyor money order payable to the Federal Communications Commission.   yO - xZԍ Requests for installment plans should be mailed to: Chief, Billings and Collections, Mail Stop 1110A2, 1919  xM Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554. Payment of the forfeiture in installments may be considered as a separate  xmatter in accordance with Section 1.1914 of the Commission's Rules. Payments by credit card are also acceptable. Please contact Chief, Billings and Collections for additional information. Please place NAL/Acct. No. 315BE0014 on the remittance and mail it to: x` `  Federal Communications Commission x` `  Post Office Box 73482 x` `  Chicago, Illinois 606737482  xForfeiture penalties not paid within 30 days will be referred to the U.S. Attorney for recovery in a civil suit. 47 U.S.C.  504(a).  X4-  0x8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested to Jan Lane Inc., and a copy to its attorney.  X- x` `  hhFEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION  X-  XN- x` `  hhBeverly G. Baker x` `  hhChief, Compliance and Information Bureau " ,N(N(ZZ" cc: Anthony C. Savastano, Esq. Law Offices of Halloran, Lukoff & Smith, P.C. 300 Union Street New Bedford, MA 02740  X_-Billings & Collections C"K1  Section Belfast Field Office DHannah